Committee orders Title 6 policy by July 1, refers funding request to budget

The Sumner County Purchasing and Financial Management Committee voted to have staff deliver a Title 6 nondiscrimination policy vetted through the committee and approved by July 1, and it referred a request for resources to the county budget to fund a coordinator role.

Committee members said Title 6 obligations — raised in discussion about federal grant requirements and employment practices — affect countywide operations, not only grant administration. Eric, the law director, warned that failures to follow Title 6 procedures could expose the county to “significant lawsuits based on discrimination,” and urged a formal complaint process, annual reporting and consistent signage across county facilities.

Members described gaps in the county’s current approach: missing formal complaint procedures, inconsistent recordkeeping and limited staff time to manage investigations and required state reporting. Several officials said most counties assign Title 6 duties to HR or a dedicated coordinator and estimated Sumner County needs roughly three-quarters to a full-time equivalent to comply fully.

After discussion the committee approved a resolution requiring a Title 6 policy be drafted and returned to the committee for approval by July 1. Separately, the committee voted to send a request to the budget committee seeking funding and/or a position to serve as the Title 6 coordinator. The motion to send the funding request passed with a majority; the transcript records one abstention and one vote in opposition.

Committee members asked staff to research existing county examples and relevant state resources and to propose a policy framework and an implementation plan that include training and tracking mechanisms. Scott, the grant accountant/project manager in the finance department, was named informally as a possible interim coordinator while a permanent appointment is considered.

The committee recorded the directive as an old-business follow-up and planned to track progress at future meetings. The action was limited to policy direction and a referral to the budget process; no permanent appointment or formal hiring action was taken at the meeting.

The committee advised that any coordinator or policy changes be consistent with the county’s grant conditions and state training requirements; staff were asked to provide specific draft language and an estimated budget for the coordinator position at the next meeting.